7 Comments

1. What_A_State on 06/10/2016 at 2:50 am

   As a Voluntaryist living in the jurisdiction known as Britain, I despise politics and its mechanisms, but my current thinking is that I should vote to leave Europe as it (apparently) means uninstalling some corrupt politicians from having a say over my life.

   Or should I even bother? Or maybe spoil my paper?

   What do other anarchists think?

   Log in to Reply
   • Corbett on 06/10/2016 at 7:08 am

     A very interesting question and I sincerely hope some fellow voluntaryists reply with their thoughts. My own thinking is that a vote for secession or a vote for nullification are the only types of votes I could ever be persuaded to be interested in…if I trusted the voting process itself. Which of course I don’t. But I, too, am curious about others’ thoughts on this matter.

     Log in to Reply
   • Lance on 06/10/2016 at 9:34 am

     I’ll keep it short, it’s late…

     I have a vote too. In a building 50 yards from my doorstep.

     I think I will vote to leave, but I have two concerns:

     The EU is the latest League of Nations. Its previous backers are seeking to destroy it to put something far more effective at control in its place.

     And, even if us Brits vote to leave – we just won’t. We’ll be “negotiating” for years or we’ll get a “miracle deal” which somehow means that everything will be fine now and we can stay or etc etc. The reason won’t really matter, we just won’t have left.

     But what can I do? I don’t actually think my vote affects anything. But I feel the strong urge to at least make my disapproval of current power systems heard. I usually just don’t vote – I would only vote if we had ‘None of the above’.

     Log in to Reply
   • What_A_State on 06/12/2016 at 11:47 pm

     Thanks for the responses. I am most likely going to vote ‘leave’ if only as my own personal protest to an immoral institution. I agree that what the globalists have planned is what will eventually play out and this is just a spectacle to keep the believers in democracy believing.

     My new rule is…what would Tony Blair do? Then do the opposite.

     But how about this? The plan is actually for the UK to leave which will start a chain of planned events to potentially destroy the EU? Obviously I am now in speculation mode, but it’s interesting to do. I pop in and read Ken’s stuff every now and then and he has come to this possibility:

     http://redefininggod.com/2016/05/globalist-agenda-watch-2016-update-11-the-1-year-delay-of-the-eu-collapse-ends-next-month/

     If there is a majority ‘leave’ vote, the political talking heads say that it would take several years to actually leave. But maybe not. Perhaps this could be the straw that breaks the fragile global financial market. Could a ‘leave’ vote “spook” the markets and cause a financial meltdown? Maybe the EU will then collapse, cause worldwide disruption and ultimately a global government will rise from the ashes, which people will be more likely to accept after years of recession?

     The globalists will then be able to say “we warned you that leaving would cause financial mess. It’s your fault. We were right. Now, how about this new plan we came up with that will save the day?”

     And just for fun…the Independence Day film release on June 23rd, is the same day as the referendum. Coincidence or subliminal prompt? The film then shows mass destruction 😉

     Log in to Reply
2. Cu Chulainn on 06/10/2016 at 10:40 am

   what do you folks make of this apparent shift in policy towards Pakistan?

   Breaking the Pakistan-Taliban Alliance
   By Zalmay Khalilzad
   9 June 2016
   The Wall Street Journal

   My view was that Pakistan was playing a perfidious and dangerous double game and needed to be called on it. But because of factors such as the (actual or supposed) important Pakistani contribution to the fight against al Qaeda, Pakistan’s role as transit route for supplies to U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and its own (however halfhearted) campaign against Pakistani Islamist extremists — senior U.S. officials either ignored evidence of Pakistani support for the Afghan Taliban or treated it as a cost worth tolerating. One result: Senior Taliban leaders were soon living openly in Pakistani cities like Peshawar, Karachi and Quetta.

   Since 2005, the Taliban and the al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network based in Pakistan have regrouped and waged a devastating insurgency against U.S. and Afghan forces…

   Pakistan views the Taliban as an effective proxy to ensure Pakistani dominance over Afghanistan, and to limit Afghan relations with India. Islamabad also doesn’t believe that the current pro-U.S. government in Kabul can survive the continuing drawdown of American forces. Last year, Pakistani officials delivered a paper to their Afghan counterparts proposing terms for a new bilateral relationship in the coming years. The terms amounted to a demand that Afghanistan subordinate its sovereignty to Pakistan.

   …in recent weeks Washington has adopted a harder line against Pakistan. Congress has imposed tighter restrictions on military aid to Pakistan, citing its failure to target the Haqqani network. Congress also prohibited Pakistan from using U.S. aid to purchase F-16 jet fighters…

   The manner in which Mansour was killed is a telling manifestation of the change in U.S.-Pakistan relations. The U.S. has been waging drone attacks on Pakistani territory since 2004, but the strike against Mansour crossed a threshold in the sense that it was the first in Pakistan’s far southwest Baluchistan province. Unlike previous strikes, it was the U.S. military and not the CIA that orchestrated the Mansour attack. By conducting the attack openly, Washington sent a clear signal that, unless Pakistan changes its policy of support for the Taliban, additional coercive measures could be on the way.

   Log in to Reply
3. HomeRemedySupply on 06/10/2016 at 12:12 pm

   June 9th 2016 – European Commission – Brussels Economic Forum

   An interesting Bloomberg interview with Werner Hoyer of European Investment Bank. He talks about giving very FAVORED financing towards different business sectors. Werner says that it is really no problem, because they have over “1,000 billion Euros” to play with overall.
   2 minute mark – http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2016-06-09/eib-s-hoyer-risk-taking-is-the-problem-in-europe
   I guess we may see certain sectors of the business sector economy suddenly balloon up, for no other reason than an unwarranted influx of funds.

   ~~~~~~~~ Muhammad Ali
   I enjoyed the anecdote about Muhammad Ali and the 1971 Joe Frazier Fight which acted as a cover while Activists broke into the FBI. (My era)
   “…The burglary, by eight activists who stole every file in the office, revealed the illegal spying operations that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover had organized against a broad swath of Americans, including Martin Luther King Jr. The revelations led to congressional investigations and major reforms of all intelligence agencies….”
   https://theintercept.com/2016/06/06/in-1971-muhammad-ali-helped-undermine-the-fbis-illegal-spying-on-americans/

   Heroes! Warriors of Information!

   A fellow old buddy in our Dallas911Truth group used to run strong with that type of crowd in the 60’s and 70’s. SDS, Anti-War Protests, Native American sit-ins, etc. He tells some very interesting and inspirational stories. He said their activist groups were sometimes so infiltrated by government goons that on occasions it was almost all government agents at an Activist Meeting.

   Log in to Reply
4. punchy1 on 06/10/2016 at 12:43 pm

   Very interesting take by James, that Bilderberg use their Agenda to role out an agenda!

   Just watched “Requiem for the American Dream” where Chomsky refers to the “Precariat” (precarious proletariat) about 29 minutes into his narration.

   Log in to Reply